User talk:Jweiss11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

1979 Tulane Green Wave[edit]

You left out Wide receiver Nolan Franz on the list of team members in 1979 Liberty bowl team that played in NFL. Franz signed with Buffalo Bills as free agent in 1981. Played several seasons in USFL, CFL and made the Greenbay Packers in 1986-87. Nolanfranz (talk) 22:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Nolan, please feel free to add Nolan Franz (is that you?) to the 1979 Tulane Green Wave football team article. I didn't write most of that article. I just did some cleanup and standardization the other day. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
It looks like this really is Nolan, unless he's lying. Check here. Lizard (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Single-game articles[edit]

A while back you mentioned a list of single-game articles of suspect notability/suitability for future AfDs . . . was 1983 Oregon State vs. Oregon football game one of them? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't recall ever pointing out that article. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:35, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Man of few words, eh? So should we keep it, delete it, or merge to Oregon-Oregon State rivalry series? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
It doesn't seem particularly egregious. I'd leave it alone. There's certainly lower hanging fruit out there like 1982 Nebraska vs. Penn State football game, and a host of Texas games: 2008 Texas vs. Oklahoma football game, 2007 Texas vs. Oklahoma State football game, 2005 Texas vs. Ohio State football game (GA), 2008 Texas vs. Texas Tech football game, and 2005 Texas vs. Texas A&M football game. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:51, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Let's take a look at nominating the weakest of these single-game articles at the end of January. That should give us a chance to to clear the remaining series record articles first. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 07:34, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Arizona Wildcats football series records and three others for deletion[edit]

Jweiss11, because of the interest you expressed in a closely related topic during the discussion @ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Texas Longhorns football series records, I am notifying you that a new discussion is taking place as to whether the following articles are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether they should be deleted:

  1. Arizona Wildcats football series records;
  2. Charlotte 49ers football series records;
  3. Texas A&M Aggies football series records; and
  4. UMass Minutemen football series records.

These articles will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arizona Wildcats football series records until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the articles during the discussion, including to improve the articles to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the articles. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 06:51, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Already commented there, my man. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:08, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Senor Speedy. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 07:29, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Cannon's Run[edit]

Is Billy Cannon's Halloween run notable enough to have its own entry? I've been working on Cannon's biography article for a few days now and I just noticed there's a page for his run, and I saw you edited it a while back. Sure, its arguably the most famous play in LSU football history but I think everything worth saying about it can fit on Cannon's page. Lizard (talk) 01:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I think that it's not notable as a single game, but as a single play. One 89-yard run determined the outcome; the article's game stats, etc., are just window-dressing for that single play. The play is already prominently discussed in the 1959 LSU Tigers football team article, as well as the history section of the LSU Tigers football main article. I think that's as it should be. I would recommend a merge and redirect to either Billy Cannon or 1959 LSU Tigers football team. What do you think, Weiss? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:51, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Dirtlawyer, thanks for chiming in. I was going to ping you for your opinion on this. I'm not sure it's productive to make a distinction here between the play and the game. We have a number of stand-alone articles for games that are famous on basis of a single play, often for which they take their nickname, e.g Miracle at Michigan, Wide Right I, Wide Right II, Bo Over the Top, Bluegrass Miracle, Prayer at Jordan–Hare, Holy Buckeye, Hail Flutie, Flea Kicker, Black 41 Flash Reverse Pass, and most famously, The Play (Stanford vs. California). That aside, I'll defer to your opinion on the notability of this game. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, that raises the question: should some of our notable single-game articles be reclassified as notable single-play articles? One trend I have observed, once an article is created on the basis of a singe famous play, many of the articles are expanded to include four quarters of scores, plays, stats, etc. Perhaps these articles should be more narrowly focused on the play, not the entire game. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I think to give proper context to the play, you have explain the game. And then you're pretty much at an article about the game. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:22, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I'll see if I can find enough info on the game to make it into a single-game/(play) article. The Black 41 Flash Reverse Pass and a few others are pretty similar, particularly because each play was a large contributor to a player winning the Heisman. Not to mention I'd even put the Halloween night game over the Earthquake Game in terms of recognition. Lizard (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

And something new . . . .[edit]

What do you think of this: Category:Dissolved sports rivalries? At the very least, it's oddly phrased -- "dissolved"? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:39, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd say "discontinued" is a better, more commonly used term.Lizard (talk) 02:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, "discontinued" sounds much better. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:52, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
But are they discontinued, "dormant" or "inactive"? I noticed this when the creator added the new category to Florida–Miami football rivalry, which is not officially discontinued and the most recent game was played two seasons ago. That's not discontinued in the sense of being over and done. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, "dormant" or "inactive" is even better. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Lizard, would you like to gently invite the creator to join us here for a chat? We can copy this discussion to the category talk page when we're done . . . . Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:18, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you're asking me to do the inviting, or if I'm fine with him being invited. I'll assume the latter since I've never done it before. Sure, I'm fine with it. Lizard (talk) 03:38, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Chicken. Face-smile.svg Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:41, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I went for dissolved as some of these discontinued rivalries weren't planned years in advance to be discontinued and often were discontinued from sudden changes such as conference realignment. Although, I agree that it wasn't the best wording by me. BryceJorgensen (talk) 04:44, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I mean, I have heard "dissolved" used in that sense before. Dictionary.com has a definition for dissolve that reads "to bring to an end; terminate; destroy." When I think of "dormant" I think of volcanoes or sleeping mythical creatures. "Dissolved" may just be the best wording, now that I think about it. Lizard (talk) 05:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Exactly, Lizard -- it implies that something has been definitely ended, as in the dissolution of a corporation. We have many CFB rivalries that are no longer annual, but have not been definitively ended. I think the generic "inactive" -- which would cover both defunct and dormant rivalries, as well as those whose status is uncertain -- might be better for our purposes. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 06:24, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Ehh I'm torn. Yes it's true that both "dissolved" and "discontinued" usually means done for good, but I still don't like the sound of "inactive sports rivalry." If you just saw that term without knowing what it referred to, would you know that it meant "2 teams that don't play each other yearly anymore"? I don't know if I would. Maybe that's just me. Also I noticed currently it only includes college football rivalries. Is that the intention, or is it going to cover every sport under the sun? Lizard (talk) 06:54, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I guess this discussion has dissolved. Or maybe it's just dormant. Face-wink.svg Lizard (talk) 16:56, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Need more input from others, Mr. Reptile. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:08, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

SAIAA[edit]

Though the cfbdatawarehouse says otherwise (1907), I have no evidence to suggest there was an SAIAA before late 1911. In the Proceedings of the annual NCAA convention for 1912, page 14, there is mention of "the South Atlantic Intercollegiate Athletic Association, an undergraduate organization, the object of which is to promote track athletics and arrange meets between the members thereof...which was formed in 1912" One can compare Kemp Plummer Battle's (I will trivially note a relative of mine) History of the University of North Carolina, where SAIAA track champions are listed for 1911 and '12 but no earlier. Further, American Physical Education Review, Volume 18 a 1913 publication states "last spring, when the South Atlantic Intercollegiate Athletic Association was organized". The New York Times in 1913 states "the second annual meet of the South Atlantic Intercollegiate Athletic Association." However, there do seem to be independent champions of the South Atlantic section going back to 1907 or further, and it is difficult to find mention of the SAIAA and football in comparison. Therefore, on the main page I have assumed 1911 is the date, yet I don't know what to do with e. g. Template:1908 SAIAA football standings. Cake (talk) 04:05, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Cake, I'm not sure what to make of this. It might be worth discussing this with David DeLassus, who admins the College Football Data Warehouse, and perhaps see what sources he's used. I can give you his email address if you are interested in contacting him. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:20, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Assuming it's the one at the bottom of the website, I just sent one. Cake (talk) 15:45, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at talk:Kickoff returner[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at talk:Kickoff returner. Thanks. Lizard (talk) 02:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

You might want to just scroll all the way down. The old discussion is mainly just mudslinging. Lizard (talk) 02:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Put your thinking cap on, please . . .[edit]

I need a fresh perspective on something. In our CFB coach and and player infoboxes, we have always used the pipe-linked short-form team name for college teams when listing the coach or player's career history (e.g., "Michigan"), and not the full university name (e.g., "University of Michigan") or the full team name (e.g., "Michigan Wolverines"). That makes a lot of sense for college players and coaches, where all of the teams listed are college teams using the same short-form name format. On the other hand, for NFL coaches who have coached both college and pro teams, it looks quite odd to see the short-form college team names (e.g., "Cincinnati") in the same list of coaching tenures with full NFL team names (e.g., "Cincinnati Bengals"). Thoughts? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

DL, I have pondered this before. A good example is Jack Pardee, who coached Houston Cougars football right in between coaching the Houston Gamblers of the USFL and the Houston Oilers. I guess the liked him in Houston! My conclusion thus far is that the oddness/awkwardness is worth it for the consistency? Jweiss11 (talk) 03:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure what we should do. I understand the logic of the short-form college team names, but I'm starting to do mop up on Infobox NFL coach, and it just screams off the page in a list of coaching positions to see short-form college team names and full NFL team names in the same list. Of course, this is nothing new . . . . My gut reaction was to include the full college team name (e.g., "Michigan Wolverines"), but I'm sure there are other consequences not yet contemplated. My next thought was to take your temperature, and that's about as far as my own thinking proceeded. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Is just having the team name not an option? e.g. Cowboys. Lizard (talk) 05:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Lizard, that seems even stranger to me. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I suppose so. The idea came from how most teams are referred to in the real world. Most people would say they're a "Seahawks" fan as opposed to a "Seattle" fan. Identification thing. Lizard (talk) 05:24, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I suppose, but in print, particularly in tables and lists, it's would be very strange to lists teams that way. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:27, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I'd agree then to just leave it as it is. Though it does irk me the same. Lizard (talk) 07:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

CFBDW links and security issues[edit]

Hey. You know there have been a series of security problems with CFBDW, right? I'm not sure if we should add any more CFBDW links until we're reasonably confident they have resolved those issues. Are you still in contact with CFBDW guys? If so, I think we need to relay a message of concern to them, and see what their response is. My 2 cents. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:28, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm aware of the recent problems. Yes, I've been in contact with David Delasses, but haven't discussed the security issues with him. I can write him an email. Do you want to be copied on that? Jweiss11 (talk) 01:46, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Please contact Delasses and cc me. While CFBDW is not the most graphically modern website, in my opinion it is still the most accurate source of historical CFB season records, scores, head-to-head series, head coach win-loss records, and national championship data. What's more, is that they have also been responsive in the past to making verified corrections in a very timely manner. In contrast, Sports-Reference.com does not respond in a timely manner, does not make corrections of verified errors, and has known data errors that have existed for several years. SR is useful for certain datapoints, but it is not, in my opinion, anywhere near as reliable as CFBDW. For that reason alone, I would hate to have to stop linking CFBDW in our Wikipedia CFB articles. That said, in the last year I have twice encountered malicious redirects by third-party malware amounting to hijacks of direct links to CFBDW from Wikipedia -- both serious enough to require a power-down hard reboot of my computer to rid myself of the malware. That's no small thing, and I feel like I am endorsing their website when I link to it from our articles. We can't continue to do that if the CFBDW folks are not committed to getting their security issues in hand, and I've got to imagine we are a major source of their website's daily traffic. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Agreed on all points. I will write Delasses a note in the next few days. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:29, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

2012 Big Island Interscholastic Federation football season[edit]

seems like 2012 Big Island Interscholastic Federation football season should be deleted as well? Frietjes (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Frietjes, thanks for the heads up on this one. I will nominated it. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:06, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks friend[edit]

For the guidance on Billy Cannon. You and the real estate attorney made the process a lot simpler for me. It was an enjoyable experience, hopefully the first of many projects from me on WP. I plan on sticking around and branching into other areas once I gain a little more experience. Lizard (talk) 19:00, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fred "Curly" Morrison, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Los Angeles Express (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Silver Anniversary Awards, etc.[edit]

Just saw this [1], and registered my opinion accordingly. In addition to the navboxes, I would really like to get rid of the kludgey succession boxes on the same subject. They are hideous, take up too damn much space, and often have a high percentage of red links that lead to the creation of articles of marginal notability. We could either delete them from all CFB and CBB players on our own, or nominate the whole kit-and-kaboodle for MfD. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 10:17, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

DL, yes, he should get rid of all those succession boxes, not just for football and basketball player, but for everyone. Is MfD the way too go, or should we just go and kill them? Jweiss11 (talk) 23:23, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
"yes, he should get rid of all those succession boxes" -- "He" or "we"? If "he," who is "he"? FYI, if we whack them on our own, I would suggest that we should cut and paste the list of names from each succession box into the List of Silver Anniversary Awards recipients to complete the list of yearly recipients. As I said at the TfD, I think the award probably exceeds the GNG standard, but it does not rise to the level of "noteworthiness" we should have for navboxes. Because the recipients are almost completely unrelated -- different sports, different teams, different universities, and no other common denominator other than having received the award -- there is a very low likelihood that any significant number of readers are using these as navigation aids. Readers will search Heisman Trophy recipients; Silver Anniversary Award recipients not so much. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 23:56, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
JW, note also Today's Top 10 Award and List of recipients of Today's Top 10 Award, which are the basis of a series of crufty succession boxes for similar NCAA alumni awards. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I meant "we" above. I just went ahead and got rid of all of the Silver Anniversary Awards succession boxes. Some of them had already been removed, by Rikster and perhaps others. There was no information in any of the remaining succession boxes that I found that wasn't already in List of Silver Anniversary Awards recipients. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:57, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Your tireless efforts never cease to amaze me. The both of you. Lizard (talk) 09:06, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Cool beans, Weiss. I whacked a few of them earlier tonight too, and had already deleted a number of them from Olympics swimmer bios. One more oddity gone. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 09:19, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
I just killed the rest of the Top 5/10 Awards succession boxes as well. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Why do we have these again?[edit]

Another reason to hate starting QB navboxes: Template:Idaho Vandals quarterback navbox. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:48, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Not a great looking navbox. I wonder how many of those guys are notable. I would guess at least a handful of the non-linked ones are. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:21, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
High percentage of red links
+ high percentage of unlinked subjects
+ low percentage of notable of subjects
+ large numbers of subjects
= usually better off as a list article.
And I'm not singling out poor old Idaho; I would just as soon see the Gators QB navbox deleted, too. These have only worked passably well for the programs that have been consistently top-tier for most of their history, because only they have had a sufficiently high percentage of genuinely notable QBs. These are like the Division II and III head coach navboxes in that they lead to the creation of a lot of stubs for subjects of doubtful notability. I am, of course, bitching for the sake of bitching. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:18, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Add me to the starting-QB-navbox-hating club. Maybe for NFL teams, but for college teams? I'm not even sure if there's a college team in the country for whom every starting QB they ever had is notable. Much less e.g. Idaho and Southern Miss. Isn't the purpose of a navbox to be able to navigate between pages more easily? Kinda pointless if there's only like 5 links in the navbox. Lizard (talk) 02:21, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Skippy Stivers is one of the bigger names without a page. Cake (talk) 02:37, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Can you take a gander at this[edit]

Could you see if you can clean up the infobox for Johnny Robinson when you have time? Those are a lot of awards and honors for someone whose article doesn't even have sections, and only has 1 source (a book cited incorrectly). Most of the awards look infobox-worthy but there's a few I've never even heard of. Lizard (talk) 02:30, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Actually, the article as a whole should probably just be nuked and started from scratch. Good lord. Lizard (talk) 02:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I did a little clean-up earlier on the article. Yes, it needs a lot of work. That's why you're here! Jweiss11 (talk) 07:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
'tis. I looked at the edit history, there's info in that article that's been unsourced for 12 years. My to-do list grows larger by the day. Lizard (talk) 17:12, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia! Jweiss11 (talk) 18:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Messy TfD for Montana State bowl games navbox[edit]

You need to take a look at this: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 January 21#Template:Montana State Bobcats bowl game navbox. I'm less concerned about the particular navbox, which has its own set of odd issues linking bowl lists, but one of the participants has made a suggestion that would further clutter our main CFB program navboxes. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:41, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Infobox conversion[edit]

Hey. As part of the Infobox NFL coach conversion process, I've found a number of templates that need to be converted to Infobox college coach, not another pro football template:

  1. Greg Adkins Yes check.svg Done
  2. Kurt Anderson (American football) Yes check.svg Done
  3. Charlie Coiner Yes check.svg Done
  4. Ted Gilmore Yes check.svg Done
  5. Ted Petoskey Yes check.svg Done
  6. Mel Tucker Yes check.svg Done
  7. Frank Scelfo (new addition) Yes check.svg Done

Given your work with Infobox college coach, I figured you were the logical person to do the conversion. There's also another half dozen listed on the WP:CFL talk page, if you're interested in converting those to Infobox gridiron football person. Even with about two dozen pending deletions via PROD or AfD, that leaves another ~220 instances of Infobox NFL coach still to be converted to Infobox NFL biography by yours truly. I'd be grateful if you could make these 7 go away. Face-smile.svg Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:50, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

DL, I took care of the first two above and will do the remaining ones in the next couple days or so. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:16, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, sir. You're still the Bestest. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 07:11, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
I should enter a karate tournament right now. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:15, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
You have a very long memory to cross-reference The Karate Kid fight scene theme music. My takeaway? I never realized how much Elisabeth Shue looked like the girl I dated my senior year in high school (minus the knee socks). Seems like yesterday. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 07:34, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Did you date Elisabeth Shue's mother in high school? Maybe a poodle skirt instead of knee socks? Jweiss11 (talk) 07:46, 25 January 2016 (UTC) I had forgotten that she was also McFly's girl in Back to the Future. Looks like she's mostly just somebody's hot mom these days. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── DL, Jeff Tedford should probably be converted to Infobox college coach too, no? Jweiss11 (talk) 05:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I've been pondering what to do with Tedford. Definitely not the NFL box, but he played and coached in the CFL, and also had a good, long stint at Cal as head coach. I think we could use either the CFL or CFB box. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

How about Greasy Neale? College or NFL? Lizard (talk) 17:32, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Because Neale also played and coach baseball and basketball, I'd say Infobox college coach does a better job. 7 Jweiss11 (talk) 17:35, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Hey, JW. There are now fewer than 75 articles remaining to be converted from the old Infobox NFL coach to either Infobox NFL biography or another more appropriate box (college coach or gridiron football person). At the present rate of work, I anticipate being done in the next 5 or 6 six days, and I would like to draw a line under this thing, redirect it to the surviving template, and then focus on some of the post-merge tweaks and clean-up of the coach-specific parameters for Infobox NFL biography (the new version of Infobox NFL player. In looking at the random links to Infobox NFL coach, I am also reminded that there are another 395 instances of Infobox pro football player lurking out there, which we still need to convert to Infobox NFL biography in the near future. There also appear to be several hundred notable CFB player articles -- HOFers and others who never. There's never a good time to do these sorts of projects, but this particular one is coming to an end. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:44, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
I have a list here of a few former coaches with no infoboxes at all. Not sure if you're at that stage of the to-do list yet but I thought I'd let you know. Lizard (talk) 04:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
@Lizard the Wizard: Keep that list on your talk page, Lizard, and I will circle back to it in the next few days. I just finished the last of the Infobox NFL coach conversions this afternoon, and I would like finish conforming all of the active NFL coach infoboxes to the standard formatting. As part of that process, we need to add Infobox NFL biography to the articles on your list, so that when we're done, all 300+ current NFL coaches will conform to the standardized infobox formatting. Let me know if you're available to help later this week and next with that effort; I plan to activate guys like Dissident93, Yankees10 and WikiOriginal-9 to help. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── JW, I converted Frank Scelfo from Infobox NFL coach to Infobox college coach this afternoon -- it was the last of the old NFL coach boxes to go, and I'm sure I made a hash of formatting it. I would be grateful if you would work your magic on it, so that it employs the standardized formatting for Infobox college coach. Thanks, Chief. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Will work for food[edit]

I'm a little disheartened. Information on Casanova is relatively scarce, at least for someone with his resume. I also seem to be having a bit of writer's block anyway. But I still wanna contribute something. Is there anything I could help out on, like a large-scale project involving adjusting some specific minuscule thing on millions of articles? Lizard (talk) 02:06, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Lizard, how do you feel about infobox templates? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:53, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Lizard, thanks for volunteering your services. Dirtlawyer could use some help with the Template:Infobox NFL coach. Check with him for the details. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm as familiar with infoboxes as the next guy I suppose. What exactly needs to be done? We can converse elsewhere lest we spam Jw's message alerts. Lizard (talk) 06:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Lizard, why don't you search my "User contributions" history, and review the last 8 or 10 edits whose summaries begin "replace infobox . . . .", with particular attention to the standardized formatting of the input data. After you've done that, let's plan on chatting on my user talk page some time late this morning or this afternoon. We started with roughly 340 of these 10 days ago, and we've manually converted about 155 of the 340 so far, leaving about 185 still to convert. It's tedious work, but (a) completing the merge of the old Infobox NFL coach, and (b) properly formatting the input data, are both priorities as we try to enforce a measure of uniformity for the new Template:Infobox NFL biography, an improved version of template:Infobox NFL player which will be used for all NFL personnel -- players, coaches, executives, owners, etc. -- going forward. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 09:07, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Stylized infobox[edit]

What is it that makes an infobox stylized with school colors, such as Doc Fenton's infobox? Is it a certain field in the infobox? I take it it's not standard since most infoboxes aren't that way. Lizard (talk) 22:34, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Ah, it's the "school" field. It's also kinda strange how the CFHOF banner is dark blue on the college football player template, yet gold on the NFL template. Wouldn't it be better if it was the same color on each? Lizard (talk) 22:40, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
We can use school colors for former CFB greats that never played pro ball because there is only one relevant set of team colors. Once an old-timer has played for more than one team, however, there is no consistent way to select colors for retired pro players. In some instances, we have examples of pro players who played for more than a half dozen different NFL teams, so by convention we only use the colors of the current team of active pro players, and grey, black and white for retired pro players. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:47, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
You learned to type on a typewriter, didn't you Mr. Dirt. Lizard (talk) 23:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Lizard, when I was learning to type in junior high school, the IBM Selectric with optional fonts and built-in correction tape was considered high tech, and desk-top computers were something called the Commodore 64, which were mostly used for playing something called "Pong" (and were virtually useless for writing and document production). So, yes, I learned to type on a typewriter, and did not become computer (semi-) literate until I was a college sophomore and WordPerfect v. 4.0 and IBM double-disk-drive PCs were all the rage.
Ah, it was the double spacing after periods that gave it away. Jweiss does it too. Just something I like to pick on the older generations for. Face-wink.svg About my age, I'll just say I've been alive for only 3 different Presidents' administrations. Lizard (talk) 20:34, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
FYI, the color of the HOF banners on the NFL infobox is likely to change to something more subdued in the near future. As a matter of graphic design, the present electric yellow/gold clashes with most of the NFL team colors. Either the midnight blue of the CFB infobox, or perhaps something like "old gold" would work better. I'll get back to you on this topic in a month or two -- I've added it the infobox issues list. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Is it redundant to put the HOF class in the infobox under highlights, e.g. Randy White's infobox? I had removed a few because I figured it was. Lizard (talk) 09:13, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Lizard, I think it is redundant to have the electric yellow HOF stripe and a separate line in the infobox "highlights" section. BTW, every time you see the word "selection" following "All-Pro" or "Pro Bowl" in an NFL player's infobox, please feel free to nuke it on sight. The word "selection" is completely unnecessary in this context, and we did away with it several years ago. It's been purged from most of the recent NFL player infoboxes, but it still lurks in a lot of the older ones. It's one of the formatting issues to be dealt with during our post-merge clean-up using bots and semi-automated editing software like AWB. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foy Hammons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hope High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Historical school names[edit]

If someone coached for a school when that school had a different name, e.g. North Texas State, I should put North Texas State in the infobox, right? Lizard (talk) 04:28, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

If you're describing someone's tenure at a school that has since changed names, things like an infobox or head coaching record table should reflect the name of the school at that time. The body of the article should also talk about that school with the name it had at the relevant time, with an explanation upon first mention about the school's current or later names. See Tommy O'Boyle, which I was just working on earlier today, for an example. He coached at Missouri State University when it was known as Southwest Missouri State College. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:33, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. The situation just came up as I'm converting Mike Heimerdinger's infobox, who has one of my favorite names in football history for sure. Lizard (talk) 04:35, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
You always want to wear a helmet when playing football so you don't get a heimerdinger. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:40, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
I audibly chuckled Lizard (talk) 04:45, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
I believe the kids are calling that "LOL"-ing these days. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:47, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
They were at one point, but that's a little behind the times. No one actually LOLs when they LOL anymore, so you have to type out what you really do. And so we've come full-circle. Lizard (talk) 04:58, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Saturday February 6 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon[edit]

Saturday February 6 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg
Schomburg-center.jpg

You are invited to join us and the AfroCROWD initiative at New York Public Library's Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for our upcoming editathon, a part of the Black WikiHistory Month campaign.

12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St

The Wikipedia training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

(Bonus upcoming event: WikiWednesday Salon @ Babycastles - Wednesday, February 17)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Al Dampier[edit]

I think Al Dampier could be deleted. I know you have plenty of experience with this stuff. He played for LSU as an offensive lineman in the 50s, and if you look in the revision history I think it's pretty clear the creator was a relative. Plus he played o-line, so there won't be much information on him besides his name on the roster. What do you suggest I do? Lizard (talk) 01:19, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, his notability looks pretty questionable. You might want to get an opinion from Cake or Cbl62 and/or see if either one of those guys can dig up sources on Dampier. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:24, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
I've been through several times picayune articles of the 1958 season and haven't seen one mention of his name. Let's put it up for thwacking. Lizard (talk) 23:20, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
I did some searches in newspapers.com and didn't find any significant coverage. Not sure if he was a starter or not, but, other than centers, offensive linemen generally don't get substantial press coverage unless they are truly exceptional. Cbl62 (talk) 01:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes, he is very difficult to find. Cake (talk) 02:35, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Like I said, it was probably a relative wanting to add an article on him. Seeing as his only contribution was creating that article nearly 9 years ago. I'm all for having LSU's football history told but there are definitely more deserving players without articles. Max Fuglar being one of them Lizard (talk) 02:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:College club sports associations in the United States has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:College club sports associations in the United States, which you created, has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  04:42, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jocko Willink, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Ramadi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

A neat image[edit]

Check this out Jweiss, since before I spoke of hoping for Tommy Spence to be remembered. Here is the 1916 Georgia Tech backfield. Thus I've found out whence came the image of Strupper, and for the first time seen what Spence looked like. The south sheds manly tears for Spence and Curry. Cake (talk) 23:15, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Any ideas for what to do for the coloring on Heisman's coaching table and the 1915 season? Tech wasn't in the SIAA that year, but claimed a southern title with Vandy. Cake (talk) 14:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
I would leave it uncolored. We don't have a color option for regional titles like this. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:50, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Fair enough. A footnote or some way to have the table acknowledge it would put me at ease. Cake (talk) 13:58, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Just curious[edit]

Do you ever actually write content for articles? or do you spend your waking hours traversing Wikipedia for broken external links and articles that need to be placed in categories. You come across as someone who could write some mean prose if you wanted to. Lizard (talk) 06:31, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I do sometime write some content from time to time. But my focus is more cleanup/formatting/project management, at least until we get things generally in better shape. It's always improving, but there's still a lot of work to do. If ever want a tedious project, like you recently asked about, I can turn you onto of number of items. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:35, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Well at the moment I'm adding pages for missing American Football League All-League Teams which is pretty tedious in itself, and I'm halfway through a season summary draft for the '58 LSU team. But I've been knocking out common "diminutive" nicknames in leads that I find, and I think I've whacked most of the assistant coach succ boxes. Lizard (talk) 06:50, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Don't think so, per Category:Super Bowl champions. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:51, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Time to purge some capital Cs. Also Polamalu's article is full of subjunctive "would"s. I know you love those. Lizard (talk) 07:21, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Lizard the Wizard would go on to purge all of the subjunctive woulds across Wikipedia, which would cure Jweiss11 of his chronic heimerdinger. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:46, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Finally got around to it. Lizard (talk) 08:41, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm a bit ashamed I didn't catch the ironic usage of it just then. It's infused in our brains to look correct. Although I don't think I've used it once since you taught me not to, like two months ago. So thank you for your grammatical wisdom. Lizard (talk) 08:02, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Weiss is right: generally speaking, "champions" and "championship" are not proper nouns. Please note, however, that "BCS National Championship" -- a phrase near and dear to the hearts of Tigers and Gators fans -- is a proper noun, and championship is properly capitalized as a part thereof. Somewhat less clear is what to do with "BCS national champions," where "champions" is arguably not part of a proper noun in that context. I've been fighting this lonely battle for several years on our national championship articles, only to be reverted more often than not by knucklehead IP users who think "Championship" and "Champions" should always be capitalized. Of course, these are the same folks who think Tight End and Free Safety should be capitalized. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:53, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Aye, I've realized. Since BCS National Championship is the name of the particular game. I'd say it should never be capitalized when referring to an individual. Lizard (talk) 18:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Jw or DL- Doesn't all of the various footnote symbols used in Template:2015 SEC football standings look a little silly when a team in the conference wins the NC and there's a mess of symbols appended to the school name? I had to do a double-take to make sure it wasn't vandalism. Is there no other way we can portray this? Lizard (talk) 08:05, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes, Lizard, the present design and typography is kinda weak. More than one or two superscript footnote symbols is both distracting and confusing to the reader. I've not really been involved with the design and maintenance of the conference standing templates (we all sort of self-select the areas in which we are involved), but there are a number of things we could do to make the conference standings tables cleaner. Remind me of this conversation in 30 or 60 days (after I get through the present infobox stuff), and we can do a mock-up with fewer symbols, etc. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:37, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
At the very least the "CFP participant" footnote can be removed from bama, no? Obviously they participated if they were the champions. Lizard (talk) 19:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Dick Stanfel[edit]

If you have a few minutes, your eyes on the Dick Stanfel navbox would be appreciated. He was just elected the the Pro Hall of Fame, and his 35+ year coaching career makes for a fairly complicated navbox. Thanks. Cbl62 (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Infobox HOF banners: new color ?[edit]

JW, when you have a few minutes to kill, please take a look at the comparison colors that Corky has worked up in his sandbox: User:Corkythehornetfan/sandbox. I've just asked him to add another stripe for the neon electric yellow used for Infobox NFL player/biography at present, so that you and others can compare them side by side. No rush, but I would like to keep this percolating. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:35, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

My 2 cents, #9 with black lettering looks best. It has that classic gold look to it, like an Olympic medal. Lizard (talk) 17:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
DL, where are those shades of gold coming from? Shouldn't we be using the colors of the official CFBHOF logo, as we have done in Template:Infobox college football player? Jweiss11 (talk) 17:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
The various golds are a sample available from the Hex color palette. Is the midnight blue/steel blue we used for the CFBHOF stripe an "official" color? If so, I don't recall that. I remember thinking it was an improvement because it was relatively muted and did not clash horribly with most of the CFB team colors . . . . For the NFL box, at least, I think we need to pick a common stripe color for PFHOF and CFBHOF, since they will exist side by side for more than a few former players. A more muted "gold" strikes me as somewhat intuitive, but I think we really need to get rid of the currently used electric neon yellow in all events. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:09, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes, blue and gray we used are from the official logo. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:13, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
So, if we follow this logic, what would be the "official" colors for the Pro Football Hall of Fame? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
I just uploaded File:Pro Football Hall of Fame logo.png. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
The Pro Football HOF logo appears to be black and multiple highlighted shades of gold. I just looked at the Canadian Football HOF logo; it appears to be wine red and gray. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:17, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Feb 16: Art+Feminism Training / Photo-Poetics @ Guggenheim
Feb 17: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
[edit]

Tuesday February 16, 5:30pm: Art+Feminism Training / Photo-Poetics @ Guggenheim
NYC - Guggenheim Museum.jpg

You are invited to join us for an evening of social Wikipedia training and editing at the Guggenheim, with a workshop given by the Art+Feminism project to prepare for next month's major campaign, and a tour and edit-a-thon of Photo-Poetics: An Anthology.

5:30pm - 8:30pm at Sackler Center Media Lab, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1071 Fifth Avenue; enter through 89th Street staff entrance
Wednesday February 17, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month, we will also host a Newcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project!

We will also include a look at our annual plan and budget ideas, and welcome input from community members on the sorts of projects the chapter should support through both volunteer and budgetary efforts.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One talk this month will be on use of Wikipedia press passes for photographers.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 00:28, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Sports card external links[edit]

Are external links to sports cards, such as the one on Larry Grantham, appropriate? I thought I noticed you remove one of these on someone else's article a while back. Lizard (talk) 03:48, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Lizard, those sports cards links are totally spammy and unneeded. The are prevalent for AFL-era player bio articles. You can nuke those all on sight. Jweiss11 (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Nuke them until they're nothing but particles. Lizard (talk) 06:43, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Agreed. Most of those links were added by internet sports card dealers trying to drum up business via Wikipedia. OTH, if you can find a good football card image that's in the public domain (i.e., not subject to current copyright), the image often makes a nice addition to the article. Unfortunately, most of the them are obvious copyvios. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Yeh, Bowman Gum cards are in public domain. But of course, none of the players I ever work on have bowman cards. Not even Cannon; he has a card by every company but bowman. Lizard (talk) 18:06, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Interesting. The culprit was warned about the self-promotion nearly 12 years ago and yet the large majority of AFL players' articles still contain links to that website. He did an incredible job of documenting all these players but still, it definitely seems like it was for personal gain or to push an agenda. I'll start going down the List of American Football League players and removing them, until I get accused of "link-removing jihad" or something. Lizard (talk) 05:48, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
  • I just finished the B's. Looks like the old AFL articles have a lot more issues than just spam links. Lizard (talk) 03:50, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes, indeed. And thank you! Jweiss11 (talk) 03:54, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Actually, if we're gonna be converting all NFL player infoboxes to NFL bio infoboxes, is there really a point in me cleaning up current NFL player infoboxes? As in, will they all be redone in the near future? Lizard (talk) 03:20, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not really up to speed on the details of this conversion, but I think there's value in at least some of that cleanup no matter what. Things like incorrect capitalization and misuse of hyphens still have to be cleaned up on a field-by-field basis independent of any larger template conversion. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:44, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Well, I think we can agree this one needed a good bleaching either way. If you ever needed a friendly reminder of how neglected the AFL player articles are. Lizard (talk) 04:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
There's IPs going around changing individual Pro-Bowls in infoboxes to sequences, which is fine and I actually agree it should be that way... but they're using hyphens. Oh the humanity. It's enough to give me a heimerdinger. Lizard (talk) 00:39, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Ya know, the thing I hate about infoboxes is how easily the info in them can be fabricated. Very few ever question the validity of claims in them, yet infoboxes are one of the most viewed parts of any biographical article. There's so much stuff that I find in them that isn't even mentioned in the article body, much less cited. For example Archie Manning's infobox, for who knows how long, had his number retired by the Saints. I'd say that's a pretty big deal. But the article said nothing about it (probably because his number isn't retired by the Saints). I lied, there is an unsourced claim in his article that says his number "has not been issued." Sam Mills is the one with no mention that I had to remove. Lizard (talk) 01:36, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Me again[edit]

Ok, if I'm reading this, this, and this right, the ONLY situation where a tweet is an appropriate source for info on a living person is when the tweet was written by that person (plus 1–5 under the "only if" section). Yay or nay? Just making sure, since I hardly ever see anyone batting an eye at Twitter sources. Lizard (talk) 03:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on this and I don't think I've ever cited Twitter for anything. I think it's always preferable to cite a third-party, if at all possible, over the subject's twitter feed, even if that third party isn't doing much more than re-posting the tweet. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:15, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Jweiss11. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
  • (Unrelated to email) This is probably minor, but do you think I should capitalize the next word after #×, e.g. 2× First-team All-American, 2× Consensus, etc? or would it be 2× first-team, 2× consensus, etc. Template:Infobox NFL player gives examples but conveniently leaves out that scenario. Lizard (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Drexel lacrosse[edit]

Be ready to fight with User:10stone5. Apparently, this page is so gosh-darn special that no Wikipedia guidelines are needed for this article... I've asked DL to for assistance here per this discussion. You can read my discussion with the user here. My reason for removing external links and categories: WP:CAT and WP:EL. The cats that were listed in the article are already listed in the other cats... Feel free to chime in. 🇺🇸 Corkythehornetfan 🇺🇸 03:52, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

His editing needs to be fixed. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:53, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Psshh... you're telling me?! lol That's why I ask the best editors on here... Face-smile.svg 🇺🇸 Corkythehornetfan 🇺🇸 03:57, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
If I ever become that protective over a page feel free to smack me with a fish. Lizard (talk) 04:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Sorry I've been AWOL the last couple of days, guys. I had my BlackBerry stolen two days ago, and I've been in full crisis mode dealing with the replacement and data back-up issues. I'll take a look at this later today, and leave a few words regarding the Lord and Shepherd of the Article, as needed. I speak fluent "lacrosse." Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:01, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Well I'm glad we have you back. I was getting worried. Everyone was running around like headless chickens, it was pandemonium. Evildoers flooded Wikipedia with diminutives in leads and wikilinks to NFL years in infoboxes. I'm not sure how we would've survived another day. Lizard (talk) 17:07, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Saturday, March 5: Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon @ MoMA[edit]

Saturday March 5, 10am-5pm: Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon @ MoMA
AF Mark 2.svg
Moma-1-logo.jpg
2015 Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at The Museum of Modern Art, New York.JPG

You are invited to join us for the MoMA Art+Feminism edit-a-thon on Saturday, to support the expansion of Wikipedia's coverage of women in the arts.

We encourage both people new to Wikipedia, and people who have experience editing online, or have joined us for past edit-a-thon events.

This is by far our biggest event of the year (over 200 participants in the last edition), and every extra hand counts, so please join and volunteer to help us engage new communities!

10:00am - 5:00pm (drop-in anytime!) at The Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Education and Research Building at the Museum of Modern Art, 4 West 54 Street - between 5th/6th, New York, NY 10019
Please note that this entrance is one block north of the main 53rd Street entrance, closer to 5th Avenue.

And bring your interested friends and colleagues!

For those outside of the city, or unable to join on Saturday, check out Art+Feminism regional and global events as well. --Pharos (talk) 21:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

March 16: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday March 16, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
ArtPlusFeminism19.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

We will also vote on nominations for the global Wikimedia Foundation board.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One likely talk this month will be on the Wikidata project.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 18:11, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Lizard's question symposium[edit]

Remember this edit that removed this image? Well, there's one just like it on Peyton Manning created by the same user. Except this one is transparent so it's probably not as ugly. It's still ugly though. How do we handle this one? Lizard (talk) 01:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Nuked it. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:47, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
No remorse. Lizard (talk) 04:22, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Mercy is for the weak. Pain does not exist in this dojo, does it? Jweiss11 (talk) 04:29, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
No, sensei. Lizard (talk) 05:43, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Yikes. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:18, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
I had found it odd when it was first posted, that a four-year starter at Michigan wouldn't already have an article. Especially with editors such as yourself around. Looks like he was kind of a starter for the better part of about 2 seasons? Lizard (talk) 01:39, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Think there would be any griping if I started moving inactive members on Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/Participant list? In accordance with the 12-month inactivity stipulation of course. It'd give us a better idea of how large the project actually is. And looking at how active the talk page is compared to other projects of similar size I'd be surprised if the true active list is even half of what it is. Lizard (talk) 05:46, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
I just clicked this guy at random off the "active" list. Lizard (talk) 05:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Go for it. An update seems well in order. Any would-be griper can simply move himself back to the active list. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:54, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Did it, but I realized when I was nearly finished that I needed to log their last edits and by which time it was 2 AM and spending any more time on it would've given me a heimerdinger. Lizard (talk) 01:22, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Could you add a module to template:infobox NFL player to allow template:infobox military person to be embedded? Lizard (talk) 23:26, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Seems like that should be doable. Looks like there's a merge going on with that infobox. Would be best to discuss adding a module with the other editor(s) involved in that merge. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:57, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Yeh I think that's one of the reasons why there are still some infobox gridiron football persons in use. Like on George Halas. Lizard (talk) 07:21, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
The other editor(s) involved in that merge are MIA. Is it not something you can just simply do? You're one of like, 10 people on all of Wikipedia with this power. Lizard (talk) 02:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Aha, you're the culprit who puts "championships, awards, and honors" when grouping navboxes. Any reason why championships is first? Because I've been doing it in alphabetical order. It's the trivial things that keep me up at night. Lizard (talk) 00:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Not sure it was me who first starting doing that. May have been our missing lawyer friend. My standard is to list all the championship navboxes chronologically, then all the awards and honors navboxes chronologically. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
I want to mention Billy Cannon's punt return in the lead somehow but I'm not sure if what I have now sounds too fanboyish. I can't come up with a good way of wording it that's been corroborated by the cited sources. Lizard (talk) 21:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
"...considered one of the most memorable plays in LSU sports history" sounds fine to me. But that should be cited in the body of the article. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeh I realized. I'll get to it when I get to it. At the rate the GA reviews are going it'll probably be another month before someone starts reviewing. Lizard (talk) 02:50, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I had contemplated on more than one occasion to move that History of LSU football page back. Someone had moved it a few months ago, citing "acronym fix"... still not sure what the point of it was but I figured they knew better than I did. Lizard (talk) 03:36, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
That person was wrong. They did not know better than you. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

If a coach resigned before the start of a season, would you include that year in his infobox? here is the specific example. Lizard (talk) 19:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I think it makes sense to credit Kavanaugh in the infobox for the two seasons he coached at Boston College, 1952–1953. So he was out of football until the Giants hired him in 1955? The situation is a little trickier for guys who were hired and then fired or died in a single off-season. So they never coached any regular seasons game with that team, e.g. Bo Rein. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:55, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Got it. Also, looks like we're halfway to being able to list DL on WP:MISSYOU. Lizard (talk) 02:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Have you checked all the hospitals and morgues in Atlanta yet? Jweiss11 (talk) 03:04, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
He may be sleeping at the bottom of a lake right now. Whoever the disgruntled client was who took him out did a wonderful cover-up job. Lizard (talk) 03:29, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Could have been a wikimurderer. He had a lot of enemies here. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:31, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Looks like Kavanaugh coached at Villanova in '54, which makes things a lot simpler. Lizard (talk) 15:45, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

This guy is getting annoying. I'm not sure what their deal is. How you've put up with stuff like this and stayed sane for the 50 years you've been here I'll never know. Lizard (talk) 06:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Patience, my friend. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm sure I learned this in middle school but I don't remember, and Google isn't helping; is this correct? Lizard (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
"Have" sounds better. But is "couple" a collective singular there? Not sure. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, but magnum opus would imply I have no larger plans. I consider it my The Last Supper. My Mona Lisa is yet to come. Which will probably be History of LSU Tigers football, which I'll get to if after I graduate in a few weeks. Lizard (talk) 06:27, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Would correcting the title case in Template:Infobox college baseball team parameters (such as Appearances to appearances) be a minor enough edit to do without discussion? Lizard (talk) 17:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
That does not need to be discussed. I just fixed the capitalization on a bunch of fields there. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:49, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

In your edit summary here you forgot "changed dash to 'Jim Laird'."

Should the |name field always match the page name, like on Frank Kinard? I dunno, I kinda like having the nickname there. Adds flavor. Lizard (talk) 16:38, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
I think so. If his primary name is "Bruiser Kinard", then that's how the article should be titled. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:53, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Actually I think it might be his primary name. It's how the NFL, PFR, and his NYT obituary refer to him. Even his 1955 Topps card. Lizard (talk) 00:46, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Want to do a page move? Jweiss11 (talk) 01:41, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
I'd say yes. Doing a bit more looking, it seems he was/is definitely more well known as Bruiser. Lizard (talk) 01:51, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Do you want to do the page move? Have you done one before? Jweiss11 (talk) 01:55, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
What do I look like, some sort of prodigy?... yeh I've moved pages before. Super simple. Just not sure if we should consider that the page has been named Frank Kinard for nearly a decade. I'm gonna do it, YOLO. Lizard (talk) 06:03, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Torn on what to do with Vernon "Catfish" Smith. Cake (talk) 17:07, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Well, at least it's not unheard of. I always get a chuckle out of Catfish Hunter. Lizard (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Troy Trojans athletic director navbox[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Troy Trojans athletic director navbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. 🍀 Corkythehornetfan 🍀 03:44, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of John Hartwell[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Barely passes the WP:N guideline. Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 19:43, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

John Hartwell[edit]

John Hartwell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "John Hartwell" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Not a notable figure. KnowledgeBattle | TalkPage | GodlessInfidel ┌┬╫┴┼╤╪╬╜ 05:55, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep NCAA Division I athletic directors are generally presumed to be notable, and inspection of Hartwell in particular turns up plenty of coverage in reliable third-party sources. He is indeed notable. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
@Jweiss11: "Generally presumed"? – List of NCAA Division I athletic directors – Almost none of them are. He just got a job. What's notable about him? KnowledgeBattle | TalkPage | GodlessInfidel ┌┬╫┴┼╤╪╬╜ 06:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
He and other NCAA Division I ADs are notable because of the amount of coverage that NCAA Division I sports, and its athletic directors, receive. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:12, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
  • DeleteLook at those articles – they merely mention that he got the job. Lots of "figures" are mentioned in passing, yet are not notable. Until he becomes "a somebody", he's still a nobody. What are you going to do with those 5 articles, all reporting exactly the same thing? Post the Wiki article on him, saying, "John got the job!<ref><ref><ref><ref><ref> ... Besides that, there's nothing to say about him, because there's nothing worth noting.? Seriously? 5 references for a single thing worth saying about him? It makes sense to delete it for now, and if he ever does anything noteworthy, then recreate it. :-\ KnowledgeBattle | TalkPage | GodlessInfidel ┌┬╫┴┼╤╪╬╜ 18:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Knowledgebattle, I don't think you're supposed to log a delete vote like this on an AfD that you opened. We know you want this article deleted. That's why you nominated it. As for the subject of Hartwell's notability, when articles in five notable newspapers are written about someone simply getting a job, then there's probably something notable about simply getting that job. Athletic directors like Hartwell are also typically covered in articles about the hiring and firing of various coaches that work for them, and the development of athletic facilities at the colleges where they work. All of this might seem trivial to you, but it is notable where it is covered by notable and realiable third-party sources. Your pejorative and factually erroneous characterization of Hartwell as "just some school football coach" on your user page does not speak well for your objectivity here. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
This is yet another feature story, continued onto a second page (here), reporting in depth on Hartwell. Cbl62 (talk) 03:28, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
@Cbl62: Oh! Well great! Out of the abyss, someone has managed to scrounge something up about him. If any of it's noteworthy, then throw it in there! I'll even read it! KnowledgeBattle | TalkPage | GodlessInfidel ┌┬╫┴┼╤╪╬╜ 16:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Excellent! Always nice to see people keeping an open mind. Cbl62 (talk) 20:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete - WP:ATH makes no mention of athletic directors being automatically notable. Notability therefore defaults to WP:ANYBIO, which does not appear to support notability. After being named athletic director there was some ephemeral media attention, though there appears little coverage of him aside from that in reliable sources. In addition, this person has not been nominated or won a well-known and significant award or honor, and has not made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his specific field, per WP:ANYBIO. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:59, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:07, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete - WP:ATH makes no mention of athletic directors being automatically notable. Notability therefore defaults to WP:ANYBIO, which does not appear to support notability. After being named athletic director there was some ephemeral media attention, though there appears little coverage of him aside from that in reliable sources. In addition, this person has not been nominated or won a well-known and significant award or honor, and has not made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his specific field, per WP:ANYBIO. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
@Magnolia677: I struck the above which is a duplicate vote by the same editor. Each editor is entitled to vote only once. ;) Cbl62 (talk) 22:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete as the matter at hand is still whether he's solid for independent notability and I'm not seeing any convincing signs of that, Delete at best for now. SwisterTwister talk 02:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete - there's no inherent notability in athletic directors. Other than routine news coverage, there's not enough in-depth sourcing to show they pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 11:53, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
@Onel5969: I agree with you in part, i.e., there is no SNG holding that athletic directors are "inherently" notable. Accordingly, athletic directors should be assessed under GNG. In this case, the coverage is significant and plainly surpasses WP:ROUTINE, which might consist of simple hiring announcements in a "Sports Transactions" column or a brief article announcing a hiring or resignation. What we have here are more detailed stories about Hartwell. The feature story I referenced above (here and here) is the antithesis of "routine" coverage. Together with the sources cited by Ejgreen above, Hartwell is a GNG pass IMO. Cbl62 (talk) 17:00, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep. I find it incredible that people should think there is no notability inherent in this very major position--at least in a major athletic university. I am not greatly interested in college athletics , but from even a casual reading of the news it is obvious that there individuals play a central role in their campuses. DGG ( talk ) 04:25, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Orphaned non-free image File:Lamar Hunt.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lamar Hunt.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:31, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

The vandalism has been reverted. 🍀 Corkythehornetfan 🍀 02:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Would you rather just have me notify you of a DI navbox that needs more articles rather than TFDing it? I don't have the time to create articles for people - unless it is a school I like (not many) - as I have other priorities on here. I also don't like creating biographies. Let me know. 🍀 Corkythehornetfan 🍀 17:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I was going to suggest you give me a heads up before TfD-ing. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 19:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Will do. I'm glad someone is willing to create the articles to keep the boxes. 🍀 Corkythehornetfan 🍀 20:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Does it makes sense for you to keep a list of these navboxes somewhere, maybe in your user space, and I can watchlist it for updates? Jweiss11 (talk) 02:21, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I can do that. I'll list them at User:Corkythehornetfan/sandbox. 🍀 Corkythehornetfan 🍀 02:43, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Does this navbox make any sense to have right now? IMO, no. I think it can be created again when other people get to coach the team, but I won't list if you think it should stay. 🍀 Corkythehornetfan 🍀 05:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
In term of navigational utility, you are right that it doesn't serve much purpose. However, even in its current form, it does make for stylistic consistency across articles. And it's not all that harmful. It's just transcluded on the one page. It's not as if it's cluttering scores of articles. What about when Shealy's tenure ends and Houston Baptist hires its second head coach? Would two blue links be sufficient for you in that case? Jweiss11 (talk) 16:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I think two is better than one... I won't nominate it. Thanks for the response! 🍀 Corkythehornetfan 🍀 17:47, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Jweiss, would you like me to list D-II & D-III schools as well? I believe I completed the NCAA Division I schools now, so I've started on NCAA Division II. ☔️ Corkythehornetfan 🌺 16:31, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, please do. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Corson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Pacific (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

April 13: WikiWednesday Salon NYC and Mini-Video Opportunity[edit]

Wednesday April 13, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon NYC and Mini-Video Opportunity
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Statue of Liberty 7.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

Special this month, a Mini-Video opportunity for individuals to share their Wikipedia experiences (during pre-meeting, 6-7pm, and in side-office during regular meetup). A videographer will be present to record 1-3 minute Mini-Videos of folks informally speaking, sharing anything about their Wikipedia-related projects, whether an edit-a-thon they joined, an article they edited, or a class project they were a part of, etc.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

We will also place our chapter's votes for the global Wikimedia Foundation board.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

6:00pm - 7:00pm Mini-Video and social hour
7:00pm - 9:00pm Regular meeting: Introduction for new participants, Noshing, Chapter projects

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 14:20, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Star for your barn[edit]

Invisible Barnstar Hires.png The Invisible Barnstar
For your constant behind-the-scenes edits fixing the little things, take this star and hang it on your barn. Lizard (talk) 15:11, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

A category?[edit]

Would not List of American Football League players be better served as a category? It's basically set up like a category page and it's way too large for its own good. Or just eliminate it altogether. Lizard (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

@Lizard the Wizard: see Category:American Football League players.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 04:49, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
I didn't even realize there were separate categories for AFL teams. But the fact remains, that list article is a mess. Completely unsourced, and the one external link is to a site ran by this guy who nearly a decade ago used Wikipedia to endorse that site, as you can see on his talk page. We're still cleaning up his mess to this day. Lizard (talk) 06:02, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Eddie Usher and common nicknames[edit]

Thanks, as always, for your cleanup work on this article. One question, though regarding removal of the nickname. It seems odd that football editors remove "common" nicknames altogether from the body of articles. It seems to me that a common nickname (at least one so common that it is how the person is identified in the article's title) should be referenced somewhere in the opening prose paragraph of the article. Either it should be in quotes within the name (e.g., William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton) or listed separately as a commonly known as variant (e.g., Richard Bruce Cheney, generally known as Dick Cheney). However, I don't think it's appropriate to wholly excise the common name from the body.

When you look at biographies of the most prominent persons in other areas of Wikipedia, the former version appears to be predominant. In the world of politics, see Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Ben Carson, Chris Christie, Rick Perry, Carly Fiorina, Rand Paul, Ron Paul, Jim Webb, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Billy Carter, Bob Dole, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, Pat Buchanan, Jerry Brown, Newt Gingrich, Bill Bradley, Ed Koch, Patty Hearst, Tom Bradley, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Jeff Sessions, Al Franken, Joe Lieberman, Pete Wilson, Al Smith. In the world of film and TV, see Charlie Chaplin, Jack Nicholson, Jerry Seinfeld, Tom Hanks, Johnny Depp, Bill Cosby, Dick Van Dyke, Walt Disney, Jim Carrey, Will Ferrell, Bob Newhart, Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, Al Pacino, Billy Crystal, Johnny Carson, Kim Kardashian, Brad Pitt, Matt Groenig, Meg Ryan, Andy Kaufman, Will Smith, Ben Stiller, Steve Carrell, Zach Galifianakis, Bill Murray, Jake Gyllenhaal, Tom Hardy, Bill Nye, Jim Parsons, Jim Henson, Tim Curry, Tim Burton, Chris Rock, Chris Farley, Don Cheadle, Ken Burns, Ken Jeong, Bob Fosse, Woody Allen, Wes Anderson. In the world of music, see Frank Sinatra, Charlie Parker, Billy Joel, Chris Brown, Ted Nugent, Eddie Van Halen, Sammy Davis Jr., Sammy Hagar, Lenny Kravitz, Sam Smith, Jim Morrison, Rod Stewart, Kenny Rogers, Johnny Cash, Bob Marley, Ed Sheeran, Stevie Nicks, Al Green, Don Henley, Patti Smith, Ellie Goulding, Chuck Berry, Joni Mitchell, Lou Reed, Debbie Harry, Pete Townshend, Jerry Garcia, Benny Goodman, Art Tatum, Dave Brubeck. In the world of business (including organized crime and organized religion), see Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Al Capone, Billy Graham, Ted Turner, Larry Ellison, Larry Page, Jeff Bezos, Jamie Dimon, Tim Cook, Jack Welch, Ray Kroc, Sam Walton, Steve Wozniak. In the world of boxing, see Mike Tyson, Manny Pacquiao, Joe Louis, Don King. In the world of authors and journalists, see Walt Whitman, Jack London, Don DeLillo, Ken Kesey, Dan Brown, Bob Woodward, Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather, Tim Russert. In the world of baseball, see Mike Trout, Alex Rodriguez, Jackie Robinson, Ty Cobb, Joe DiMaggio, Lou Gehrig, Denny McLain, Ken Griffey Jr., Cal Ripken, Jr., Reggie Jackson, Rod Carew, Hank Greenberg, Ted Williams, Pete Rose, Tom Seaver, Max Scherzer, Jim Palmer, Randy Johnson, Greg Maddux, Bob Gibson, Steve Carlton. In the world of tennis, see Jimmy Connors, Andy Murray, Andy Roddick, Steffi Graf, Chris Evert, Pete Sampras, Rod Laver, Don Budge, Stan Wawrinka.

The other method is to list the common nickname in the lead as an alternative name, and this method also gets a good deal of usage. See Dick Cheney, Tony Blair, Katy Perry, Missy Elliott, L. Ron Hubbard, Nicki Minaj, Ben Affleck, Tim Allen, Tom Hayden, Pat Benatar, Sam Cooke, Ray Charles, Ritchie Valens, Les Paul, Patsy Cline.

Another variant is listing the nickname first, followed by "born [full name]." This one is a rare minority approach, but gets some usage. See Jon Stewart.

The only prominent example I found, outside the sports arena, where the common nickname had been excised completely was Mick Jagger, which has been a bit of a battleground on this point over the past couple years, having been formatted in each of the three manners. In that case, "Sir Michael Philip Jagger, generally known as Mick Jagger" strikes me as the right way to go.

Personally, I am ok with either the first- or second-described formats, but I don't think the common nickname should be completely excised from the narrative text of an article. If a person was commonly known as Bill, Bob, or Tom, that name ought to be referenced, at least somewhere, in the opening prose paragraph of the article. Thoughts? Cbl62 (talk) 19:06, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

@Dirtlawyer1: I see you are alive! Care to weigh in here? Jweiss11 (talk) 19:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
By chance, I noticed someone removed "Babe" from George Herman Ruth Jr. about a month ago (along with adding a comma before Jr. – another hotly debated subject). This is the first time I've seen this rationale of "obvious because the nickname is the article name." I think it should only be removed if it's a diminutive. But then, is Dick a diminutive of Richard? Bill for William? Bob for Robert? Peggy for Margaret? Or are those just common nicknames. Lizard (talk) 22:59, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Cbl, what you've argued seems reasonable. I was mostly following Dirtlawyer's lead on this, and he seems to be mostly MIA these days. At this point I really don't know if there is a consensus on this matter, and if so, what it is. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:14, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
@Lizard the Wizard: My concern is the same whether we call it a 'diminutive' or a 'common nickname'. The point is that, throughout most of Wikipedia, the prevailing approach is that where a person is commonly known as Ken, Sam, Kim, etc., and the article title uses that name, then the common name/article title is also referenced in the opening narrative of the article. (The examples cited are pretty clear.) Yet, there has been a recent move among football editors to completely excise the common name/article title from the opening paragraph. I don't particularly care whether we use the "William Jefferson 'Bill' Clinton" or the "Richard Bruce Cheney, generally known as Dick Cheney" approach, but the common name/article title ought to appear in some manner in the article's opening narrative paragraph. Cbl62 (talk) 23:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Saturday April 30: Contemporary Art of the Middle East and North Africa @ Guggenheim[edit]

Saturday April 30, 1-6pm: Contemporary Art of the Middle East and North Africa @ Guggenheim
NYC - Guggenheim Museum.jpg
Monir Portrait-exh ph021.jpg

On Saturday April 30, 2016, in conjunction with a global campaign, the Guggenheim will host its fourth Wikipedia edit-a-thon — or, #guggathon — to enhance Wikipedia's coverage of modern and contemporary artists from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, and to counter geocultural systemic bias on Wikipedia.

The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of the Guggenheim UBS MAP Global Art Initiative, and build on the model of campaigns like the Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the Guggenheim: Women in Architecture, Wikipedia Asian Month, and Art+Feminism.

New and experienced editors are welcome. The event will include a training session for participants who are new to Wikipedia and Wikipedia specialists will be on hand to provide basic instruction and editing support.

Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global MENA Artists Month partnership page to coordinate international and online events as well.

Time: Presentation: 1:00 pm - 2:30 pm, Edit-a-thon: 2:30pm - 6:00pm
Location: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1071 Fifth Avenue (88th Street), New York City, New York 10128
Guests should enter using the 88th Street entrance via the ramp at 88th Street and Fifth Avenue

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Colors...[edit]

You gotta source? Face-smile.svg ☔️ Corkythehornetfan ☔️ 01:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

No. I pulled it from Langston University. Did I quick search for a university marketing handbook or something of the sort, but couldn't find anything. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:44, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay... I looked at the History. I apparently pulled the colors from this source back in September 2015, which I converted the RGB codes. I've gone ahead and added the source. ☔️ Corkythehornetfan ☔️ 01:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Great. Thanks for doing the research there. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tim Pendergast, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hamilton College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Major city piping[edit]

Hi Jw - I've noticed that you tend to change piping for major cities (e.g., Chicago to Chicago, Illinois) to reflect both the city and state in the piping. Your edit here is an example. I had wondered about that, but figured you knew something I didn't. Then today, I noticed an MOS discussion on this precise issue. See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking#What sort of linking here. The discussion is a bit unclear. If you have views, you might want to chime in. Cbl62 (talk) 23:20, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

BTW, thanks much for your recent efforts at filling in complete names for All-Americans and all-conference players. This is super-important and time-consuming. Cbl62 (talk) 03:10, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Yep, thanks for the heads up on the MOS discussion. I've just been cross referencing the letterwinners lists in various team media guides to figure out the full names on those all-X lists. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:15, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

May 25: WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference[edit]

Wednesday May 25, 6pm: WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference
MediaWiki-smaller-logo.png
NYC - Washington Square Park - Arch.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon.

This month's WikiWednesday Salon, we'll meet and share with the MediaWiki software development community, through a community learning night at NYU on May 25.

6:00 pm: Introduction, pizza
7:00 pm: MediaWiki tutorial, community involvement and extension ideas, novel uses of wiki technology
8:00 pm: State of the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikipedia / Wikimedia community
9:00 pm: Monthly WikiSalon in San Francisco video-link, casual bicoastal chat

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2016 (UTC)


(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Sunday June 5: Women in Jewish History Edit-a-thon[edit]

Sunday June 5, 12-5pm: Women in Jewish History Edit-a-thon
Women in Jewish History 2016 Wiki Logo.png
1 CJH Women in Jewish History Editathon May 4 2012.JPG

Join us for a full Sunday of social Wikipedia editing at the Center for Jewish History (drop-in any time!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to Women in Jewish History.

All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required.

Expanding coverage of Jewish women on Wikipedia makes these women and their creations discoverable, addresses the gender bias on Wikipedia in a positive way, and works to correct imbalances archival collecting practice and institutional projects that have historically silenced women's narratives.

A training session on editing Wikipedia will be held at 12:30 pm. Experienced Wikipedians will be on-hand to assist throughout the day. Please bring your laptop and power cord; we will have library resources, WiFi, and a list of suggested topics on hand.

Light refreshments will be provided.

Make edits! Ask questions! Be bold!

Time: 12:00 pm – 5:00 pm
Location: Center for Jewish History, 15 West 16th Street (between 5th and 6th Avenues), New York City, New York 10011

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:02, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our June 15 WikiWednesday and other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

  • Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Question?[edit]

Is it just me or is something wrong with the brackets in 2010 NCAA Division II football season2014 NCAA Division II football seasons I know I have seen them before and no strange editing has occurred. Do you have any thoughts or insight on this?UCO2009bluejay (talk) 01:04, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

June 15: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday June 15, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

Featuring special guest presentations on Wikipedia Asian Month and Wikipedia Club at Ohio State University.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism! AfroCrowd!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 01:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our AfroCrowd June calendar, June 29 Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA, and July 15 Wiknic @ Central Park, among other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Whatabotthis?[edit]

List of Creighton Bluejays football opponents is this article notable?UCO2009bluejay (talk) 19:08, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Lol. Lizard (talk) 19:11, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
@Lizard the Wizard: I don't see too much difference between this and everything else in Category:College football all-time series recordsUCO2009bluejay (talk) 19:44, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Nor I. I had favored deletion for the Notre Dame one when it went to AfD as well. My argument being that if we allowed one, we'd eventually get a bunch of lists like this. Lizard (talk) 19:48, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
This Creighton list should be deleted along with the Notre Dame list as well, since all those other lists of the same form were deleted at AfD. The Notre Dame one should be nominated again once a more air-tight rationale can be laid out. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:39, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
IMO, the first thing that should be done is an evaluation of the "airtight" sources. Many of these don't cover the series per say. Others you may recall are not reliable. Still yet several mention passing references to a series or as the SEC fans believe "a rivalry" (sorry Lizard but you are an exception rather than the rule to the SEC madness.) and don't even cover the series record. After this chipping away maybe some sense will prevail.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 01:12, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Ways to improve Tulsa Golden Hurricane baseball[edit]

Hi, I'm JudeccaXIII. Jweiss11, thanks for creating Tulsa Golden Hurricane baseball!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Article needs to be assigned to a Wikiproject.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. JudeccaXIII (talk) 19:46, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Wednesday June 29: Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA[edit]

Wednesday June 29, 6-8:30pm: Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA
Wiki Loves Pride 2015 WikiNYC.png

Join us for an evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Museum of Modern Art Library's second annual Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon, during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to LGBT art, culture and history.

All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required.

Also featuring a lightning talk by CUNY students at the La Guardia and Wagner Archives on a project to document local 1980s HIV/AIDS activism on Wikipedia.

Experienced Wikipedians will be on-hand to assist throughout the day. Please bring your laptop and power cord; we will have library resources, WiFi, and a list of suggested topics on hand.

Time: 6:00 pm – 8:30 pm
Location: Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Education and Research Building at MoMA, 4 West 54 Street - between 5th/6th Ave, New York, NY 10019
Please note that this entrance is one block north of the main 53rd Street entrance, closer to 5th Avenue.

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 21:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our Sunday July 10 Wiknic in Central Park and other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Surely[edit]

I've noticed your focus on college coaches lately. Surely, this isn't what we want, is it? This editor has done this for dozens of coaches over the past day or two. Lizard (talk) 02:56, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. We don't want that. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:52, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
(Sorry to but-in) FYI, I've noticed this as well and left a comment on his talk page, explaining that we don't include this and inviting him to ask questions on the WikiProject pages. (I know I had some growing pains too when I was new on templates, [especially infoboxes] myself).UCO2009bluejay (talk) 18:53, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm sure we all had growing pains with infoboxes. I kinda hate how accessible they are. I don't think it's a stretch to say they're the most viewed part of an athlete's page, and as such it's the most edited and vandalized. That's why I've been so uppity on standardizing them. Lizard (talk) 19:18, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Looks like it didn't work. [2]UCO2009bluejay (talk) 04:25, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:American footballers convicted of crimes[edit]

If we're going to have this, we'll have to deal with the crime in itself of calling football players "footballers." How do we name this? "American American football players"? "American players of American football"? "American football (not soccer) players"? Lizard (talk) 03:16, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:American players of American football convicted of crimes. Jweiss11 (talk) 08:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Eh. Lizard (talk) 22:08, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Cat got your tongue, boy? Jweiss11 (talk) 03:39, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Sunday July 10: WikNYC Picnic @ Central Park[edit]

Sunday July 10, 3-8pm: WikNYC Picnic
Wiknic logo.svg
Group finale Wiknic NYC 2015 jeh.jpg

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Manhattan's Central Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck.

3–8pm - come by any time! The picnicking area is the southwest section of the Great Lawn, north of the Delacorte Theater, just inside the park at Central Park West between 81st & 82nd. Enter the park at West 81st St.
Look for us by the Wikipedia / Wikimedia NYC banner!
Subway: 81st Street – Museum of Natural History, C Line NYCS-bull-trans-C.svg

We hope to see you there! --Pharos (talk) 14:55, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

College Basketball RM[edit]

Could you consider commenting at at Talk:NCAA_Men's_Division_I_Basketball_Championship#Requested_move_21_June_2016 regarding the move request of NCAA Men's Division I Basketball ChampionshipNCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 21:35, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Michigander notability?[edit]

Hey, Does Tom Huiskens pass notability? If you don't think so would Speedy G5 be applicable. Also, the CFL link is a message board.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 02:33, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

That Huiskens was a GM in the CFL seems like the best argument for his notability. Definitely not a speedy candidate, and certainly not a G5 given Cbl62's work on the article. I'd run this by Cbl62 to see his thoughts about an AfD. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:38, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't read it close enough, a GM of a CFL team would pass notability. Would you suggest nixing the 4th citation though (It linked to a message board as best I could tell.) Also with that fact would an infobox change be in order, since that would be the key to his notability.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 04:40, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kentucky Intercollegiate Athletic Conference logo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kentucky Intercollegiate Athletic Conference logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Department of Navbox Redundancy Department[edit]

See Bruce Matthews (American football) (which really should be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, I'll fix that). His page has Template:Tennessee Titans and Template:Titans Retired Numbers. Shouldn't we either nuke the retired numbers template or take the retired numbers section out of the Titans template? Lizard (talk) 00:08, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the NFL team navboxes are a disaster and need to be overhauled. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
I know Dissident93 deals with navboxes a lot. Maybe he has some housecleaning ideas. Lizard (talk) 03:45, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
There's been some discussion on this in the past if you want to the dig through the WT:NFL archives. In short my recommendation is to make them look like the college sports team navboxes. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:50, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Ah, hay in a needlestack. Lizard (talk) 03:51, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Not sure really. They should all at least be in a collapsible navbox, though. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Is there a reason we don't include Template:Madden NFL games on the players' pages? Was there a discussion about this, or is it just being overlooked? Lizard (talk) 17:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Good re-revert? or am I in the wrong?[edit]

Please see this. An editor is claiming (perhaps because it is their school) that this my edit is not compatible with WP:Universities however, I haven't seen this in any of the D-I programs or frankly any other team that has a category set up for their team. Thanks-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

UCO2009bluejay, I agree with you here. Seems like a basic categorization issue. I am unaware of any relevant WP:Universities standardshere, but whatever standards they have, they should be in line with the college sports projects and, moreover, with site-wide categorization principles. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:37, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Case Western Reserve football logo help[edit]

Could you assist me with correcting the formatting on the team logo for the Case Western Reserve football wiki page?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_Western_Reserve_Spartans_football

I am unable to remove the "gray bar watermark" out of the image. Only when you click on it, does it revert to its correct colors and formatting. The image was provided to me directly from the university with permission to use it on the football wiki page. Usaf 1832 (talk) 14:13, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm not great with image editing. You may want to post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football and see if someone there can help you. Jweiss11 (talk) 14:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm pretty decent at it, but I think firstly we should try to figure out why the image displayed in the infobox is different than the one on the file page. Sometimes it can take a while to display the change if the image was recently edited, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. Weird. Lizard (talk) 14:42, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Might it need a transparent background? Compare the Sewanee logo. Cake (talk) 14:58, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
That seemed to fix it. I don't know how to make it transparent on a JPEG, but tell me if the png is ok. Cake (talk) 15:06, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Looks fixed. It's not possible for a JPEG to be transparent. That's one of the main reasons PNG exists. Lizard (talk) 15:35, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
I see. If one is curious of the method, I use paint.net's "magic wand" tool to do it. Cake (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:College Football Hall of Fame balloting has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:College Football Hall of Fame balloting, which you created, has been nominated for merging into Category:College Football Hall of Fame. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:21, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

August 17: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday Auugust 17, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

Featuring special guest presentations on WikiVerse and Bringing Wikipedia to the Last Mile.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (UN Women!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 23:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Prep for our chapter elections next month in September (and add your candidacy!): Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Elections

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Proposed deletion of Eric Weinstein[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Eric Weinstein has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Has been raising notability concerns, with several suggestions for deletion, for five years now, and no sign of improvement.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sleety Dribble (talk) 22:57, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Wow. Expanding our horizons are we? Lizard (talk) 23:44, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

1931 Bulldogs[edit]

Would you be so kind as to figure out how I messed up this article? Can't figure it out. Cake (talk) 09:25, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Nevermind, not just that article. Guess AFB game box done goofed. Cake (talk) 13:07, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Purge the page (edit it but don't change anything; just hit save). It's fixed now. Lizard (talk) 15:51, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

September 14: WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting[edit]

Wednesday September 14, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month will also feature on our agenda, upcoming editathons, the organization's Annual Meeting, and Chapter board elections.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (UN Women and CFR!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

Along with the main meeting, hummus and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 18:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

CFB importance scale[edit]

I was about to open up a discussion on this, and I probably still will, but I looked into it and noticed your involvement in this many moons ago. Do you still agree with what was come up with? My main issue is with the articles that are deemed "Top" importance. Looking at the current importance scale, it seems to suggest the only articles that should be Top are D-I seasons and some general football concepts. But Category:Top-importance college football articles lists D-I seasons, some football concepts, seasons of every national championship team (by any selector, claimed or otherwise), and numerous stadiums (including the Superdome. What?). Either that scale is outdated and obsolete, or no one really gives a damn. Most likely both. Lizard (talk) 03:32, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Open the discussion up. The assessment scale definitely needs work. Not too many editors probably care much about it, but Cake does a fare bit of assessment work, so he should be interested. For one, I always felt the main team articles, e.g. Michigan Wolverines football, ought to be of higher importance than any individual season, even national championship seasons, e.g. 1901 Michigan Wolverines football team. I also agree with your edit to rate Stagg at top importance. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:36, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
At the moment there's 7 individuals I think should be top: Walter Camp, Parke H. Davis, Pop Warner, Yost, Rockne, Heisman, and Stagg. Those are pretty much the most highly regarded people when it comes to shaping the sport. Lizard (talk) 03:47, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Hard to argue with those seven. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:49, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
The vain hope is for all the articles to be assessed, then allowing for further refinement of both assessment and criteria. The importance scale allows for special cases such as the seven. You should focus more on the asterisks/footnotes. For example, though any old D1 stadium is mid importance, the footnotes state "Facilities that have served as the home site for multiple national champion team seasons and/or regularly hosted a top-tier (BCS/top-10) post-season game should start two levels higher than given." Therefore, the Superdome, the Swamp, Doak Campbell, &c are all top importance by the letter of the law. Note also "National champion team seasons, Hiesman Trophy winners [sic], consensus first-team All-Americans, should start two levels higher than given; conference champion seasons, All-Americans, and other major national award winners should start one level higher than given." Thus national champions (aside from issues of which selectors count, whether the school claims it, &c) are also top importance. Cake (talk) 17:02, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Also, not to argue, but with the hope they are not forgotten, along with Camp and Davis in the early days there is Alex Moffat and Arthur Cumnock. And Heisman had 6 or 7 Southern titles. McGugin had 11. Cake (talk) 17:08, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
  • FWIW, if I were to narrow this group to a top 10, it would be Bryant (6 NCs and the #1 legend of the #1 program in the modern era), Camp (as father of the game), Hayes (4 NCs, builder of the Ohio State program and maybe the #1 "character" in the sport's history), Leahy (4 NCs and a sick .864 career win pct), Paterno (#1 all time in wins), Rockne (highest win pct in history of the game), Saban (5 NCs and counting), Stagg (early innovator), Warner (4 NCs and early innovator), and Yost (4 NCs and early innovator). Parke H. Davis is not be a "top" level guy IMO; he was an important historian of the sport, but, from what I've read, he was not remotely in Camp's league (or even Stagg or Yost or Alex Moffat or Fritz Crisler) as a shaper/founder and is not close to top tier as a coach with 37 career wins. Given that Davis isn't even among the hundreds and hundreds of persons who have been inducted into the CFHOF, ranking him as one of the most important figures in the game's history seems to be a major stretch. Cbl62 (talk) 19:21, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
  • FYI Georgia Tech and Auburn played each other at the end of the year, many times deciding the Southern crown. From 1913 to 1919 it was Donahue; Donahue; Heisman; Heisman; Heisman; Heisman; Donahue. Donahue coached such greats as Kirk Newell and Moon Ducote. In 1904, Tech hired Heisman, Auburn hired Donahue, and Vandy hired McGugin. Kerr was Pop's assistant. Think we can all agree on Camp, Rockne, Warner, Stagg, and Yost. Cake (talk) 20:06, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad you cleared that up about Park H. Davis, because I was on the fence with him. That being said, I didn't even notice he wasn't in the hall, and if I had I definitely wouldn't have listed him. My rationale was to have top importance be the shapers of the game in its early years, until around pre-WWI (although Rockne would be an exception). But those 7 were meant as an initial list; I fully expected you guys would come swooping in with your suggestions. So yes, if we expand it to individuals in all of the sport's history, Bear Bryant, Paterno (whose article I would like to mention has a paltry amount on his coaching history. See my comment on that talk page), Hayes, Saban, etc would all fit the bill. The scale does need an overhaul though, as would any scale that, in the scope of college football, places more importance on the Superdome than Walter Camp. Lizard (talk) 00:46, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I wonder what a similar list of players would look like. For those who were inaugural inductees to the Hall of Fame and also either won a Heisman or were consensus All-American for multiple seasons: Ted Coy, Charles Dudley Daly, Walter Eckersall, Benny Friedman, Red Grange, Bill Hollenback, Frank Hinkey, Pete Henry, Pudge Heffelfinger, Chic Harley, Truxton Hare, Nile Kinnick, Eddie Mahan, Bo McMillin, Brick Muller, Jim Thorpe, and Ed Weir. Germany Schulz is a notable exception unless we count "all time" All-America teams. If I were to pick 10 from this list, I would go with Grange, Thorpe, Coy, Mahan (Thorpe's favorite), Daly, Eckersall, Hare, Heffelfinger, Henry, and Hinkey. Cake (talk) 21:10, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
  • In what is likely the least popular opinion here, does the importance scale really matter anyway. Could this be better served by promoting the key pages (which I understand this is supposed to help with), in encyclopedic form rather than "!bureaucratic" form. Sure, I agree as it stands it is somewhat arbitrary and unenforced, and I would like to see greater consistency. That being said each editor is going to watch articles that are of particular importance to themselves. I find the importance scale archaic (because wikipedia seems to mandate this), and basically uninformative, as editors would have to go to the talk page to find how much of a "priority" these articles are. Furthermore, hypothetically who would stop that ULL guy from editing these pages and change UL-Lafayette to "top" priority, and UL-Monroe to low priority (not that he would actually do this), or say St. Cloud State from a hypothetical "low" to "high". Let's be honest, do we really focus on promoting, and strengthening the "top" articles more so than certain "mid" or even "low" priority articles? With several thousand (understatement) articles that would need to be re-evaluated, I believe this is a time wasting procedural humdrum activity. For those who want to do so, I can respect that as long as consistency is applied across the board with reevaluation. Lastly, I mean this lovingly, any time anybody wants to delete, move, or merge an article with the CFB tag several higher profile editors tend to give their two cents in and swarm it like flies on (it) anyway. So if we keep our collective eyes on it as a whole, why does this matter.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 21:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
All of these are valid points. Yes, we're not fooling anyone with these importance scales when it comes to article quality. It was seeing Amos Alonzo Stagg as merely "high" importance that sparked me into bringing it up. But in the end it's mostly meaningless to anyone other than the handful of us discussing it here, flexing our college football history muscles. Lizard (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)